September 2011
The great mulesing debate
While the media in my part of the world is still full of discussion regarding the ban on Live Exports and the future of the northern cattle industry, it was interesting to pick up a copy of the “Weekly Times” (Victoria’s rural newspaper) the other day and see a front page article regarding US supermarket giant, Tesco, looking to transition to purchasing meat from un-mulesed sheep (though most cross-bred meat lambs do not require the procedure.)
The mulesing debate first appeared in the press around 2005 and 6 years later it seems it is still not resolved. So what is mulesing, why was it introduced and why is the debate still raging?
When merino sheep (the main wool producing breed in Australia) were first introduced in the 1800s, they were big animals with a large number of skin folds.
These skin folds were seen as a way of increasing the surface area of the sheep and therefore the wool producing capability of the animal. However, once in Australia the sheep blowfly (Lucilia cuprina- introduced form South Africa in the 1900s) became a problem.
The blowfly likes warm, humid conditions; wet, damp wool from rain and humid conditions, urine stained wool around the breech (in ewes), pizzle areas (in rams) and any open wound are ideal conditions for the blowfly to lay its eggs. This results in the condition called Blowfly Strike, with maggots hidden beneath the wool and feeding on the rich protein source of sheep flesh.
While the maggots fall off after 3-5 days, these struck areas become attractive egg laying areas for other blowflies and the cycle continues, often resulting in death, as early detection is difficult.
In the 1930s, when flystrike rates ranged from 60-120 percent, JH Mules accidentally slipped when shearing a fly struck sheep and cut some skin from her breech area.
He then tested this on more animals and saw that it reduced the incidence of flystrike (to 1-3 percent).
This is due to the fact that as skin either side of the rear and tail is cut away, the remaining skin heals and becomes tighter and has less dense wool follicles, while urine etc may stain the wool and create a desirable area to the blowfly. Mulesing is only allowed to be performed on lambs under 12 months of age and is usually performed when the animal is around 6 weeks of age - this reduces the amount of skin that needs to be cut away and facilitates faster healing.
In the mid-2000s, there began calls for a ban on mulesing, largely brought about by PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). This resulted in a large amount of research on alternatives to mulesing and an industry statement that mulesing would be phased out by 2010. While much progress has been made on alternative treatments, few of these have been made economically viable and so the phasing out timeframe has been extended indefinitely. However, many producers have opted, where possible, to discontinue using the surgical mules method for flystrike prevention. The aim of Australian Wool Innovation (AWI), which is the body responsible for research and development of the wool industry, is to remove the need for mulesing and provide methods to replace the practice so that mulesing is no longer needed. Some of the most recent technologies available are:
· Genetic selection for animals resistant to flystrike and with less breech wool cover (used extensively but has a slow rate of progress through breeding)
· Welfare improved surgery through pain relief from anaesthetics and enhanced training (currently used extensively)
· Flystrike prevention clips which clip over a pulled area of skin at the breech, causing this to fall off and a scar being left to heal (these are now commercially available)
· Intradermal injections which cause skin contraction without a wound (not yet very successful)
In order for transparency in the wool market, the National Wool Declaration has also been created. This allows wool producers to market their wool as either non-mulesed, Ceased mulesed (the property no longer practices mulesing at all) or pain relief treated and for purchasers to know the origins of their product for their own decision making.
While much research is being undertaken and alternatives to mulesing being discovered and used, until new techniques become economically and mechanically viable, it is necessary for some producers to continue to use the mules procedure to ensure the on-going health and welfare of their stock.